Hi Marsha. I'm not quite sure what you are agreeing with, but it's good to agree. You don't have to prove anything to me. I enjoy your posts. It is hard to communicate without SOM, was my point. Let's reduce it to the Quality level. That way there will be no need for computers.
Thanks for the encouragement. Mark On Dec 17, 2009, at 1:23:23 AM, "Marsha Valkyr" <[email protected]> wrote: From: "Marsha Valkyr" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [MD] CO2 and Climate. Date: December 17, 2009 1:23:23 AM PST To: [email protected] Hi Marl Now I have to prove to you, in some language, that I know? Hahahaha... I might better be able to dance it on the back of you hand like some Waggle Dance. And your reducing it to SOM is the Intellectual Level! Exactly what Bo has been shouting from the rooftops, and I agree with him. Thanks for making me dance. Marsha On Dec 17, 2009, at 3:53 AM, markhsmit wrote: > Hi Marsha, > I like to think of it as realism. If you get too far away from the body, there > is no way to teach. Patterned and unpatterned experience. Explain > experience to me without the physical. Yes, they are all labels, all > metaphors, it is the way we communicate. Static v dynamic, unchanging > v changing, all based around motion. These are just labels as well subject/ > object talk. I know you feel it, but communicating it is the hard part. What > is > the difference between static and dynamic, between patterned and unpatterned? > How do you distinguish? Give me some examples and I'll reduce it all to SOM. > Slap a tree down, and I'll think that maybe you are getting it. > > How does the experience come about? What is so different about it? What > exactly do you mean by experience? Our sense of self? Does it require > movement? Are patterns necessary for experience? Give me another word for > experience. > > Thanks for making me think. > Mark > > On Dec 17, 2009, at 12:28:21 AM, "Marsha Valkyr" <[email protected]> wrote: > From: "Marsha Valkyr" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [MD] CO2 and Climate. > Date: December 17, 2009 12:28:21 AM PST > To: [email protected] > > > So, all this talk, Mark, about "The way this intellect achieves knowing is > through the mechanics of the brain and the body." and "So in this way, the > intellect is the "soul"" is just so much static subject/object talk. - Marsha > > > > > On Dec 17, 2009, at 2:49 AM, Marsha Valkyr wrote: > >> >> Hi Mark, >> >> I'd like to take a stab at an explanation... >> >> RMP has equated quality/value/experience/reality (They are the labels, not >> the experience.) I like to use the word 'experience'. From an emerging >> Quality level there is Experience (unpatterned (DQ) and patterned (sq)). All >> the talk of quality, experience, self, stone-age men, barking dogs, brains, >> minds, bodies, and even the MoQ is talk of analogues. From the Quality Level >> there is no explanation, only experience: unpatterned and patterned. Talk of >> Absolute truth, conventional truth, relativism is all still just >> intellectualizing about analogues. There is a saying that goes something >> like 'If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him'. The Buddha is sometimes >> equated with the dharma, the teaching. So my understanding is that, in the >> end, even the teaching needs to be killed, like "Kill all intellectual >> patterns. Kill them completely." On the Quality Level there is only >> experience, unpatterned and patterned. >> >> imho >> >> >> Marsha >> >> >> >> On Dec 16, 2009, at 11:24 PM, markhsmit wrote: >> >>> >>> On Dec 16, 2009, at 1:45:58 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>> In many places Pirsig uses the term knowledge as synonymous with >>> intellect, but "ability to know" makes me a little uneasy. Stone Age >>> (social level) humans knew to perfection what was necessary for their >>> existence, but this (both dextrous skill and the "how to") knowledge I >>> relegate to intelligence. By knowledge in connection with intellect we >>> mean something grander, the objective, scientific truth as contrasted >>> to the subjective "I just wish - or want - this to be true". Don't start >>> about science's limitations, all this is part of the MOQ's scope . >>> >>> Hi Skutvik, >>> Interesting that you would think the current knowledge as objective. It is >>> quite clear to me >>> that it is all subjective. That you would claim it to be objective belies >>> the depth of >>> hypnosis you are in. If it is objective, then why doesn't a tree know it? >>> Science is a >>> creation of the human brain, nothing more. There is no objectivity in >>> language, in >>> communication, all of it is subjective agreement, no different from a >>> barking dog. >>> Yes it has meaning to us, but that is about it. A barking dog has meaning >>> to a dog. >>> It is time you break this cage you are in. The human appreciation of >>> existence is >>> Quality itself, nothing more. I can see that you wish to be at the top of >>> the heap. >>> But it doesn't take much to see through all of that. You seem to be cast in >>> a spell. >>> All of it may have meaning to you, in the name of Pirsig, but there is so >>> much more. >>> You are just scratching the surface. There are many trails, MoQ is one of >>> them. I know >>> you believe Quality to be some large encompassing absolute truth, but it is >>> a bubble >>> of truth amongst many other bubbles. It is sustained by convention within, >>> but not from >>> without. Try as I may, I can see that this bubble will be hard to break, >>> but fear not, there >>> is nothing to fear. Open your mind. >>> >>> All the best in your journey, >>> Mark >>> Moq_Discuss mailing list >>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >>> Archives: >>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ >> >> Moq_Discuss mailing list >> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >> Archives: >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
